MR. McCLELLAN: Good afternoon, everybody. I want to begin with
one statement by the President. And then I have an announcement to
update you on for the President's schedule.

As you all are aware, the Senate just voted to confirm Priscilla
Owen to the bench. This is a statement by the President: I applaud
the Senate for voting to confirm Justice Priscilla Owen. She has
served with distinction on the Supreme Court of Texas, has demonstrated
that she strictly interprets the law, and brings a wealth of experience
and expertise to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit. I urge the Senate to build on this progress and provide my
judicial nominees the up or down votes they deserve.

Again, that's a statement by the President. Now, one statement to
make on the President's schedule. The President will travel to Denmark
prior to his participation in the G8 Summit in Gleneagles, Scotland.
The President's bilateral program in Denmark will take place on July
6th. Denmark is a close friend and ally of the United States, and
Prime Minister Rasmussen is a strong proponent of effective
transatlantic cooperation.

The President's visit, his fourth to Europe since his second
inauguration, underscores the President's commitment to working with
our European partners to advance freedom and prosperity in the world.
And with that, I will be --

Q Any other stops on that trip?

MR. McCLELLAN: That's all I have to update at this moment. And
with that, I'll be glad to go to your questions.

Q The other day -- in fact, this week, you said that we, the
United States, is in Afghanistan and Iraq by invitation. Would you
like to correct that incredible distortion of American history --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, we are -- that's where we currently --

Q -- in view of your credibility is already mired? How can you
say that?

MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, I think everyone in this room knows that
you're taking that comment out of context. There are two
democratically-elected governments in Iraq and --

Q We're we invited into Iraq?

MR. McCLELLAN: There are two democratically-elected governments
now in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we are there at their invitation.
They are sovereign governments, and we are there today --

Q You mean if they had asked us out, that we would have left?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, Helen, I'm talking about today. We are there
at their invitation. They are sovereign governments --

Q I'm talking about today, too.

MR. McCLELLAN: -- and we are doing all we can to train and equip
their security forces so that they can provide for their own security
as they move forward on a free and democratic future.

Q Did we invade those countries?

MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, Steve.

Q Is Prime Minister Abbas doing enough to crack down on terror?

MR. McCLELLAN: First of all, let me start by saying that the
President looks forward to welcoming President Abbas back to the White
House tomorrow. President Abbas was elected as part of the democratic
wave that is sweeping the Middle East. He was just elected this past
January, so he is now coming to the White House this time as the
democratically-elected leader of the Palestinian Authority. And the
President looks forward to talking with him about a range of issues.

This is a hopeful moment in the Middle East, when Prime Minister
Sharon is moving forward on his Gaza disengagement plan. And it's
important that this disengagement effort is successful. We want to do
all we can to support President Abbas and the Palestinian people as
they work to put the institutions in place for a viable democratic
state to emerge in those areas. And so we will be talking about that.

And we also expect the leaders will also be talking about the
challenges that all parties have as we move forward on his two-state
vision. The President strongly supports the two-state vision that he
outlined of Israel and Palestine living side-by-side in peace and
security. And the way to get there is the road map, and the road map
spells out obligations that both parties have. And it's important that
those responsibilities and obligations are met.

President Abbas has publicly spoken out against terrorism, and
against violence aimed as Israelis. He's publicly spoken about
stopping terrorism, and it's important that he continue to move forward
to dismantle terrorist networks and organizations. That's one of the
responsibilities he has.

As I said, all parties have responsibilities. Israel has
responsibilities, as well, and the President has spoken very clearly
about those, as well. And it's important that the security forces be
reformed. We designated General Ward to go to the region to work with
the Palestinians to reform those security forces. The Palestinian
leadership has begun to take some steps to reform the security
apparatus. There is more to do. And so that's what we will continue
to urge them to move forward on -- the steps that they are taking -- we
will continue to urge President Abbas to move forward on the steps he
is taking to meet his responsibilities.

And as he does, and as the Palestinian people do, we will be there
to stand with them and support them. And the international community,
I believe, will be there to support them and stand with them as they
work to put those institutions in place. The United States has made
substantial commitments to the Palestinian Authority already in terms
of financial assistance. Japan came forward recently with a commitment
of significant financial resources. We urge others to do the same and
do their part to help President Abbas and the Palestinian leadership as
they move forward to fight corruption and end terrorism and build the
institutions for democracy to emerge and put in place economic
reforms.

Q Scott, a question about filibuster compromise. Unlike
Republican leaders like Senator Frist, who said on the Senate floor
that he thinks Democrats are trying to assassinate the President's
judicial picks, the President, if you remember, in the press conference
sort of distanced himself from that kind of rhetoric, saying he
actually thinks Democrats have a philosophical disagreement with him
about these judicial choices and didn't ascribe it to political
motivation. That said --

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, I remember someone asked that question.

Q I did. But that said, does the President then think this is a
fair compromise? Does he think it's reasonable that he should get
some, but not all? Or does he think he should get everything and give
nothing?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the President continues to believe and push
for our nominees to receive an up or down vote on the floor of the
Senate. The Senate is moving forward on nominees who have waited for
years to simply receive an up or down vote. Now they are going to get
one. That's real progress in terms of these nominees. And we are
pleased that the Senate is moving forward on those nominees. And we
will continue to work and push for up or down votes on nominees as this
process moves forward.

Q But, Scott, I mean, you know very well this is such a heated
topic, and it's driven in large part by not only senators in the fight,
but by activist groups who sort of pumped this level up. And it seemed
like the President recently was trying to ratchet it back down to more
of a philosophical disagreement. So, naturally, the President is going
to push for his nominees and push for up or down votes -- but I just
wonder if he thinks at this stage it's actually an equitable
compromise? And does he in his own mind realize that he's going to get
some of these judges and not get others? And does he think that this
--

MR. McCLELLAN: I understand. This was an agreement among
senators, and the Senate procedures are matters for the Senate to work
out.

Q But you guys get involved, though.

MR. McCLELLAN: But we are pleased that progress is being made on
nominees. The President recognizes that his responsibility is to
appoint -- or nominate individuals to the bench. The President
believes in appointing highly-qualified individuals who have a
conservative judicial philosophy, people who will interpret the law and
not make law from the bench. And that's what he will continue to do.
And it's the responsibility of the Senate, in our view, to give those
nominees an up or down vote, and the Constitution spells that out.

Q Just one more try at this. Does he think that the discussion
and the compromise has helped this process, ultimately, for a future
Supreme Court vacancy?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think it's been a victory for our judicial
system. It's been a victory for fairness, because now they're moving
forward on nominees who for years have not received their up or down
vote on the floor of the Senate. But we will continue to push for
nominees to -- for all nominees to receive an up or down vote on the
floor of the Senate.

Go ahead, Mike.

Q Does the President plan to make any changes in his process for
nominating judges in light of this compromise? Will he vet them
differently? Will he try to pick more moderate people?

MR. McCLELLAN: That's what I said -- I expect he will continue to
appoint people who interpret the law and not make law from the bench,
people who share a conservative judicial philosophy. The nominees he
has put forward are highly-qualified individuals that are respected by
those who know them best, and Priscilla Owen is a great example of
that. She was someone who was one of the President's first judicial
nominees. Back in 2001, she was announced as part of that initial
batch of judicial nominees. The vacancy that she is filling is a
judicial emergency. And we have said that the Senate needs to move
forward on these nominees. Now they are moving forward on her
nomination and other nominees who have waited years for a simple up or
down vote. But the President --

Q So he's not going to consult the Senate any more than he has
in the past?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I mean, the President -- we have -- the White
House has and will continue to consult the Senate on judicial
nominees. We welcome opportunities to listen to any views they have.
But the President is going to continue to move forward on appointing
individuals who have a conservative judicial philosophy and believe in
interpreting the law, not making law from the bench. And that's what I
would expect them to do. That's something he ran on when he first ran
for office, and when he ran for reelection, as well.

Go ahead, Terry.

Q Scott, there's an FBI memo that's been released today through
a Freedom of Information request. It dates from August 23, 2002, and
recounts the interrogation -- the interview of a detainee at Bagram.
And in this memo, the FBI recounts that this detainee says he had
nothing against the United States, but the guards in his detention
facility do not treat him well, their behavior is bad; about five
months ago, the guards beat the detainees and they flushed a Koran in
the toilet.

Now, there has been some statements coming from some administration
officials since the Newsweek retraction of its story that a Koran was
flushed down the toilet, that the United States government had no
knowledge of any such allegation.

MR. McCLELLAN: This is referring to a detainee, right?

Q Correct.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I think what the Department of Defense has said
is that they have found nothing to substantiate any such allegation.

Q At one point I believe Mr. DiRita said that there was no such
allegation.

MR. McCLELLAN: You can check with the Department of Defense on his
words, but I know that they have publicly said that they have found
nothing to substantiate any such allegations. There have been
allegations made by detainees. We know that members of al Qaeda are
trained to mislead and to provide false reports. We know that's one of
their tactics that they use. And so I think you have to keep that in
mind, as well.

Q For sure. How important is it --

MR. McCLELLAN: But in terms -- I mean in terms of if there's any
abuse of detainees, we take any such allegations very seriously. And
if there is abuse of detainees, we hold people to account -- you
mentioned mistreatment of a detainee -- and we have done that, and we
also take steps to correct any problems. And we have done that, as
well.

Q Are you saying that there is no substantiation of any Koran
desecration at all at Bagram or Guantanamo Bay?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, if you look back, I think the Department of
Defense briefed last week, and they talked about the specific
allegation that you're bringing up, and they have found nothing to
substantiate any such allegation. In terms of the handling of the
Koran, that's a different matter, and they have talked about that, so
you might want to look back at what they've said.

Go ahead, Goyal.

Q I have two questions, one on the goodwill visit of the First
Lady. It looked like from the visit that she's representing well the
United States and the President. She's very charming and friendly and
outgoing. My question is here that there's an old saying there's
always a great woman behind a successful man. How the President take
this?

MR. McCLELLAN: Mrs. Bush is a tremendous asset to this
administration. And she returned last night from her trip. I think it
was a very successful trip. Mrs. Bush went to the Middle East to talk
about the importance of supporting freedom and to talk about advancing
women's rights, something that has been very important to her,
personally. She also went there to talk about the importance of
improving education and making sure that all children receive an
education and to make sure that women have full participation in
society and full participation in the political process. She had a
very good trip. She updated the President about it, and she was
pleased to go there.

Q Second question is on the -- May month is Asian Pacific
Heritage Month proclaimed by the President. Today, President is going
to celebrate in the East Room, and I'm sure many bright and brilliant
Asians will be there. What can Asians, you think, 10 million or so,
can expect today from the President? Because their concern is also
really immigration, visas, and also family reunion. And what they are
saying is immigration process so slow that families are waiting for 10,
15 years --

MR. McCLELLAN: First of all, the President will be celebrating
this occasion today and he will -- it's an opportunity to celebrate the
contributions of Americans who are of Asian and Pacific ancestry. And
so he looks forward to that event later today. President Yudhoyono of
Indonesia will join him for that event. They are going to be meeting
before that, and I'm sure they'll talk about a range of issues, as
well. But I think we've talked about this issue before; I don't really
have any update for you on it.

Q Scott, can I ask one more question about the airspace alert of
May 11th? You mentioned that the White House emergency notification
system was not triggered. Who made that decision? Why was it not
triggered?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, I mean, we review all these matters and look
into it. I don't think we need to get into all that publicly. But
it's been looked at, it's been reviewed; people are making sure that
any steps that need to be taken to strengthen our procedures are
taken. And when it comes to you all, I know there were some concerns
raised and we've taken some steps to address that already.

Q The reason I'm asking is this is an issue for the entire West
Wing, right, that the system didn't go off. Is that not an issue of
concern and --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's -- but I think you have to look back at
what occurred and what happened and the steps that were taken. These
steps weren't in place prior to September 11th. They are now in place,
and there are a number of different measures, security measures, that
are in place that people are following. So there's a lot of backup
measures, as well. And so I think you have to take that into account.
But, obviously, you look at those issues and make sure they're
corrected and work to make sure they're corrected in the future.

Bob, go ahead.

Q Any change in the protocol of notifying the President of the
circumstances?

MR. McCLELLAN: There's no change from what I told you last week.

Go ahead, Ann.

Q The Senate is now going to schedule a vote on the stem cell
legislation that passed yesterday. What does President Bush think
should be done with all of the frozen embryos in clinics that are not
going to be used?

MR. McCLELLAN: Actually, the President talked about that very
issue yesterday, and --

Q I don't think he addressed that --

MR. McCLELLAN: I think -- actually, I think he did. The President
was pleased to welcome families here to the White House, families that
had adopted children as embryos. It showed a life-affirming
alternative that is available for people. And when it comes to frozen
embryos, I think we have to keep in mind that it's a small percentage
overall that is actually used for research, or potentially discarded.
And the President yesterday wanted to highlight what these families
have done. The President believes we ought to encourage people to
choose a life -- a life-affirming alternative to the discarding of
these embryos. And that alternative is adoption, because the President
believes we should value life at every stage. And that's -- we should
value life in America, and that means at all stages. And that's what
the President was talking about.

Now, in terms of the stem cell policy, the President was also
making a very important principle -- or stating a very important
principle and what his policy is. The President's policy is that we
should not be using public dollars for the destruction of life. And
that's where -- he believes very strongly in that ethical line, and
that we should not cross that ethical line.

Q But for the families who do not wish to have their frozen
embryos given up for adoption, are you -- is the President saying that
those should just be held forever?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's the choice of the parents. But if you
look at what is currently in place, more than 88 percent choose to keep
those embryos frozen so that they can be used for future families. And
it's a small percentage that is actually used for research -- less than
3 percent -- and an even smaller percentage that is actually
discarded. The President believes that there is a great alternative
available to that, and that is adoption. And that's why he was pleased
to welcome those families here yesterday, and the children who they
adopted and to talk about that alternative.

Q But he'd rather have them discarded than used for medical
research?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I don't think that's what the President said.
I think the President said what I just said.

Q Can I just follow on that, Scott, because certainly adoption
of additional embryos is a terrific alternative, but, I mean, do you
really mean to suggest that those people who support stem cell research
and public funding for it, for the promise that that holds in the
scientific community, is that not life affirming, as well?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm not suggesting anything of that nature.
What I'm saying is in response to the question about these frozen
embryos, but -- and the President's belief that we ought to promote a
culture of life in America and that we ought to value life at all its
stages. The President believes very strongly that we must pursue the
tremendous possibilities of science, and he believes we can do so in a
way that respects the dignity of life and that maintains our highest
ethical standards.

Keep in mind that the President instituted a policy where it has
now led to federal funding for some 600 stem cell lines that have been
sent to researchers. There are more than 3,000 that are available and
waiting to be used for research, as well. We want to explore the
promise, but we're still in the very early stages of that.

Q You're making a judgment --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, but let me --

Q -- there was a big debate about the existing lines --

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, but let me make -- I'm coming to an important
point, because the President talked about this yesterday. He talked
about how the decisions we make today have far-reaching consequences.
That's why when the President came into office he appointed a bioethics
advisory panel to look at these issues, to make recommendations and to
advise him on these decisions that we face. We must pursue life-curing
treatments, but we also must meet moral and ethical obligations. And
that's what the President was talking about yesterday. And the one
principle that is very important in his policy is that we shouldn't be
using public dollars to fund the destruction of life.

Q Scott, does the President have any concern that in this
particular field of research, the United States, for all its
technological genius, lags well behind many other countries in the
world?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, there is a lot of private research going on,
as well.

Q That's the stuff that's at least, at the very minimal, keeping
us in the game, but we're well behind a number of --

MR. McCLELLAN: The President has worked to double funding for the
National Institutes of Health. The President has provided substantial
federal resources to exploring the promise of adult stem cell research,
as well as embryonic stem cell research. But as I said, there are
far-reaching consequences to the decisions that we make today. And the
President believes we can do so -- we can advance the promise of
science in a way that meets our highest ethical standards. And that's
the approach he's taken.

Q But the hard and fast fact is that even with the private
research that is going on today, the United States lags well behind
other countries in this field of research. And I'm just wondering if
this President, who keeps on talking about science and technology, is
concerned at all about that.

MR. McCLELLAN: John, actually, this is in the very early stages of
its -- the stem cell research is in its very early stages.

Q Right, as it gets further and further out, we're falling
further and further behind.

MR. McCLELLAN: We don't know the full promise of it because it's
in its very basic research stages. And that's why the President has
put forward a policy that he did to be the first President to provide
federal resources for embryonic stem cell research, as well as
significantly increase funding for adult stem cell research.

You know as well as others that adult stem cell research is showing
tremendous promise. We also strongly support the legislation for
umbilical cord blood stem cell research and believe it's important to
move forward on that legislation, too.

Let me go here, back -- go ahead.

Q Yes, the President said yesterday that there are no spare
embryos. I'm wondering what the President would say to those potential
parents who create embryos knowing that some of them are going to be
lost, some are going to end up frozen forever; in their efforts to
create one child, one baby, that they are effectively destroying many
embryos in order to do that. Does he see an irony in that?

MR. McCLELLAN: And I think I just pointed out to you some of the
facts about frozen embryos and I think you should listen to that. But
the President supports in vitro fertilization. And I don't think the
way you characterize it in any way reflects his view.

Go ahead.

Q Scott, there's a lot of activity about Iran this week. Does
the White House support some bills that are making their way through
the Senate -- or in the House rather, one that makes it more difficult
-- one that requires investments who hold -- companies doing business
with Iran to divest their funds. There's another one that seeks
penalties against foreign companies that invest more than $20 million a
year in Iran's energy industry. Does the White House --

MR. McCLELLAN: I'd have to take a look at the specific pieces of
legislation. I think our views on Iran have been made known very
clearly, and our concerns about Iran, and our support for the people of
Iran as they seek greater freedom. But I'd have to look at the
specific legislation. I don't know the exact legislation you're
referring to.

Q Some of the statistics that have been bandied about say Iran
could have four or five nuclear bombs at this point, or nuclear
warheads. Does the White House confirm any of that?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's -- and, in fact, right now what we're
doing is supporting the European efforts to make sure Iran does not
develop a nuclear weapon. The Europeans and the United States share a
common goal. We also now share a common approach. If you'll recall,
we expressed our support for the approach they are taking to make sure
Iran is not developing any nuclear weapon under the cover of a civilian
nuclear program. And they are continuing to have discussions. They
spelled out the importance of having an objective guarantee in place to
make sure Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.

If you'll recall, Iran was hiding its nuclear activities from the
international community for some two decades, and that's why we were
suspicious about their activities and that's why we are skeptical about
their activities. And that's why it's so important to have an
objective guarantee in place to provide confidence to the international
community that they are not developing a nuclear weapon.

Q For the second day running, the news about Zarqawi being
wounded has been in the headlines. I'm wondering if you have any
details about that, considering that there is another report that he's
been taken to a neighboring country for treatment.

MR. McCLELLAN: No.

Q And if you think that if his injury or ultimate death will
lead to the insurgent being weakened?

MR. McCLELLAN: A couple of things. One, no, I have no additional
information beyond what the army said yesterday, which is that they had
no information to be able to verify what the state of his health is, or
whether or not he had, indeed, been wounded.

And in terms of Zarqawi, he is someone we continue to pursue. I
think you've seen the coalition forces and Iraqi forces have worked
together to go after some of his key lieutenants, and they're bringing
to justice some of his key lieutenants. They have done so over the
course of the last few weeks. And we will continue to pursue him and
bring him to justice, as well.

In terms of the insurgency that you brought up, the terrorists that
are there, or the remnants of the former regime that seek to derail the
transition to democracy, this is a determined enemy; they are trying to
do everything they can to derail the transition to a free and peaceful
future for the Iraqi people. But the Iraqi people are showing that
they are determined to build a brighter future that is based on freedom
and democracy, and we are there to support them and help make sure that
they can defend for their own security as we move forward, so that our
troops can return home.

And so this is a determined enemy. It is more than just one
person. And we will continue to work with Iraqi security forces to
defeat the enemies of freedom that are in Iraq. They will be
defeated. And the Iraqis are providing -- are playing a much bigger
role in that. I noticed some reports today about some of the raids
that Iraqi security forces have been engaged in, going after those who
are enemies of the Iraqi people and enemies of freedom. And they've
been performing well. But there is more to do to build up those
security forces.

Q Scott, the House ignored the President's veto threat and voted
to ease the restriction on stem cell research. It looks like John
Bolton's nomination will go to the Senate floor, but it's the Senate
Republicans urging its colleagues not to vote for the nominee. And the
President is having problems getting his Social Security package, even
among -- even facing resistance among some members of his own party.
Is there a concern about sort of an onset of lame duck status around
here?

MR. McCLELLAN: You wouldn't want to take a more cynical look at
things, would you? (Laughter.) Let me back up and let's talk about
where we are with this Congress. This Congress has been in place since
-- for just over four months now. We have made significant progress in
the first four months or so of this Congress. The Congress has passed
class-action lawsuit reform. The Congress has passed common-sense
bankruptcy reform. The Congress passed a -- or adopted a budget
resolution that reflects the President's commitment to funding our
highest priorities while keeping us on track to cut the deficit in half
by 2009. They moved forward and passed a supplemental to make sure
that our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have the resources they need to
do their job and to make sure that the security forces in those two
countries that we're working to train and equip are meeting that
objective -- significant resources provided there.

The House has moved forward and passed a comprehensive energy
bill. The Senate is moving forward this week in committee on that
legislation. It's important that they get that legislation to the
President as soon as possible. The President has been calling for that
for some four years now, and the American people have waited long
enough. It's time for them to get him a bill to his desk that he can
sign into law so that we can reduce our dependence on foreign sources
of energy. So there is important progress there.

In terms of Social Security, I would disagree with the way you
characterize it. I think we are making important progress on a very
difficult issue. We're seeing steady progress. The objective of the
President initially was to reach out to the American people and explain
the problems facing Social Security. The American people clearly
understand that there are serious problems facing Social Security. And
when the American people see problems, they expect Congress to act to
solve those problems. Congress is moving forward now in the Senate and
House on Social Security reform. And we welcome those steps. So
there's steady progress there.

Sometimes the legislative process isn't going to move as fast as we
would all like, particularly on an issue that was this difficult.
Otherwise, we would have already solved this problem. But there are
real problems facing Social Security, and now you're seeing Democrats
who once said that there was no problem, saying, well, there are
serious problems, but we should do nothing. Yet, you've got a few that
are starting to break ranks and say, no, we need to put something on
the table about how to solve this. The President welcomes those who
are coming forward with ideas in hopes that we can move forward on
these important priorities in a bipartisan way to get something done
for the American people.

Go ahead, Greg.

Q Scott, Amnesty International report today, saying the U.S. is
a top offender of human rights. Does the White House dispute that
assessment?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think the allegations are ridiculous and
unsupported by the facts. The United States is leading the way when it
comes to protecting human rights and promoting human dignity. We have
liberated 50 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have worked to
advance freedom and democracy in the world so that people are governed
under a rule of law and that there are protection -- that there are
protections in place for minority rights, that women's rights are
advanced so that women can fully participate in societies where now
they cannot.

We're also leading the way when it comes to spreading compassion.
The United States leads the way when it comes to providing resources to
combat the scourge of AIDS. The President put forward his emergency
plan for AIDS relief to fight the scourge in Africa and high -- other
highly afflicted areas of the world. So I just think it's ridiculous
and not supported by the facts when you look at all that we do to
promote human rights and promote human dignity in the world.

Q On various reports of abuse, whether it's at Guantanamo Bay or
Afghanistan, you've often said that those are isolated incidents. Are
there any U.S. policies, though, in place currently that have lead to
those isolated incidences that should be reevaluated?

MR. McCLELLAN: We are a society based on laws and values -- it's
not just laws, but also values that we hold dearly. And certainly,
what you bring up has been a stain on the image of the United States
abroad. But if you look at how we address these matters, it shows our
commitment to human rights and human dignity. We hold people
accountable when there is abuse. We take steps to prevent it from
happening again, and we do so in a very public way for the world to see
that we lead by example, and that we do have values that we hold very
dearly and believe in.

Q So the current policies aren't contributing to the problem?

MR. McCLELLAN: No. No.

Go ahead.

Q Scott, House Republicans have decided to dial back on their
proposed provision that would limit women's roles in combat, now
creating allowance for the military to wait 60 days. What is the
President's position on this new provision, and what will he say to the
women Naval Academy cadets who he'll be speaking to on Friday who may
have enrolled in that institution, expecting to fulfill jobs they may
not be allowed to --

MR. McCLELLAN: Thank you for your service and sacrifice, just as
he will say to the male midshipmen, as well. The President greatly
appreciates the job that our women are doing in the military. They're
serving in many roles and many capacities, and they're serving and
sacrificing as we wage this war on terrorism and as we work to spread
freedom and democracy in the world. We appreciate all that they are
doing in the military.

In terms of policy, I think that you can talk to the Defense
Department. We do live in a time when there are new emerging threats
that we have to address. And the battlefield is changing in the 21st
century. And I think you have to recognize that, as well. The policy
of the Department of Defense has been and continues to be that women
should not be in direct ground combat roles. And we support that
policy, but we also have to move forward -- and the Secretary of
Defense has been working closely with congressional leaders on this
very issue. And we have to -- as we move forward, we have to look at
the -- how the battlefield has changed and how to address those
changes. And I think that that's what they're committed to doing.

Q Should they change the motto, do all you can do?

MR. McCLELLAN: And in terms of -- in terms of the Naval Academy,
because you asked about that, I'll probably be able to talk more about
it tomorrow. The President is still working on his remarks. He looks
forward to giving the commencement address at the Naval Academy. If
you'll recall, back in 2001, it was the very first academy that the
President went to to give such a commencement address. This was prior
to September 11th. And the President in those remarks talked about the
importance of transforming our military to address the emerging threats
that we face. And so I expect that the President will note that, and
refer back to some of what he discussed previously, because now you
have midshipmen from that class who are serving in the war on
terrorism, and serving honorably and making tremendous sacrifices. And
we appreciate what they're doing.

So I think the President will talk about the war on terror and the
progress we're making, but he'll also focus on how we're working to
transform the military and what we've done since that time, as well as
what we're in the process of doing to transform our military to address
21st century threats.